I really enjoy the way you produce your videos Kyle. They’re always so informative and enjoyable to watch. Really inspiring stuff. Great images by the way!
Lomo 800 is an absolute gem, epecially on 35mm. It's my absolute go to film when I can get my hands on some, and it even pushes extremely well into 1600 to give you some really great capabilities of hand holding in interior scenes. The grain on 800 on 120 is also pretty flattering, and not very noticeable for a high ISO film.
@@KyleMcDougall I can't say I agree, lomo 800 is without a doubt the worst colour film stock I have ever used. Grainy, horrible colour and definitely not an 800 speed film.
I recently tried out some Lomo 800 but I don't think it came out all that well. I am fairly new to film photography so it is most likely user error. I'm super thankful for UA-cam and how easily accessible learning and tips are for all kinds of things. So hopefully my next roll will be much better. If you're interested you can see my results from the roll of Lomo 800 on my channel. If not, thats also cool.
Thank you for showing us your process "under the bonnet" regarding your process for editing film. It's honest and informative. I hope you are enjoying your time here in England, even with the turbulent weather!
Great review of this film. You do a very thorough job. The Wimbledon White Mustang with the couple sitting inside was an incredibly touching photo! Nicely done.
Love lomo! Really love the color rendering and grain on the 100 and 800 and I'm planning on using it as the dedicated stock for a street photography project in mind
Photos of cars are oftentimes a dime a dozen, but the way you got the shots with the people IN the cars is absolutely stellar and really elevates something of a stale subject of analog photography. Kudos for that. I'd love to see a zine just focused on this type of theme alone.
Thanks, Justin. This isn't normally the type of event or thing I'd shoot, but it was a fun day out with the camera and I'm happy with the images. Glad you enjoyed them.
I've found that Ektar color shift issues in the shadows is almost always a scanner setting issue, or caused by inversion software. When camera scanning and inverting by hand, I don't have this issues. My older scans from my minolta scanner and flat bed scanner had this issue. Scans inverted by software had this issue... its a film that needs a special care.
Agree, lomo film has a nice look. Had problems using it for long exposures in my pinhole camera. Image of backing paper coming thru on a couple of rolls.
I have found in my limited experience that different brands will use slightly different film cassets. More specifically the internal spool of a 35mm cartridge. For example, Fujifilm 200 used to have a different canister and casset. Because it is now rebranded Kodak Gold 200, the canister and casset is identical. If the canister, casset and fastening mechanism to the internal spool are similar to Kodak, it is probably Kodak.
Around the 4:15 mark you mention setting ISO to 80 "just to be safe." For a film photography novice, can you (or anyone else reading this) explain why setting your camera lower than box-speed would be a smart decision?
If you set it a bit lower than box-speed, the camera will overexpose the film just a little. Its just to make sure you get all the detail in the shadows. Film can handle overexposure much better than underexposure. Its easier to bring the highlights down in post compared to bring the shadows up. This is the opposite when shooting digital.
Yep, as mentioned below. I'll often do this if I'm using the internal meter in a camera, just as insurance incase it underexposes a bit in a certain situation.
Beginner here, just wondering how the shot at 4:43 is taken? The subject is moving but its less blurred than the rest, only thing I can guess is that it was shot with low-ish shutter speed and the subject's movement was tracked with the camera? Thanks
Yeah, the camera pan needs to match with the speed of the subject to keep it sharp while the background is blurred. Really common for car race photography, and you're right about the shutter speed needing to be low for a more dramatic blur.
Yep, what was mentioned above. I believe this was shot with a 1/15-second shutter speed, and then panning to match the speed of the car. It can be hit or miss.
Image quality of the Lomo CN stocks is quite good, and I much like the look. But I have problems with it in 120 format in old (folding) cameras, as it does not wind up properly (the roll gets much too thick). I guess this has to do with the coating of the backing paper.
@@KyleMcDougall The coating on the backing paper seems to be too "smooth" or slippery, so that the (very primitive means) of keeping tension on the film don't work properly with old folding cameras. Should be no problem with later, more professional MF cameras. I didn't have light leaks so far.
@@KyleMcDougall I also have this Problem in my Fuji GA645, Bronica SQA and Pentax 67. In the last year I shot around 15 rolls of Lomo 400 and in 5 - 6 rolls have this problem. It's really disappointing because I like Lomo. I contacted Lomography about this, but they said that they had never heard of this problem before. But I read a lot about this. I cannot believe they never heard about this. So it seems like they don't care about this problem. I think it's quite a big problem and I cant use Lomo in my Cameras properly anymore.
Beautiful video and photos as always, Kyle. Great car show, too! One small *criticism* - Critique: a detailed analysis and assessment of something, especially a literary, philosophical, or political theory Criticism: the expression of disapproval of someone or something on the basis of perceived faults or mistakes
Is that you can get Kodak Gold in 120, I find no use for Lomo 100 anymore to be honest. Gold is also cheaper, gives you an extra stop and less grainy In my own experience.
How come you use Negative lab pro instead of Lightroom to do those same edits? Also, can you put the negatives into Lightroom and then make them positive by taking the top right end of the tone curve all the way down and the lower left end all the way up?
I enjoy using the panel in NLP, and have found that I end up making as many adjustments as possible with it. And you can always go back and tweak if necessary. As for manual conversion in LR, yes, you can do that as well. It's been a while since I've done it, and I believe you need a specific technique to compensate for the orange mask.
I think Lomo 100 started out as the old medium format Kodak Gold 100. But I have it on good authority that they changed the base and altered the formula slightly a few years ago, so it's not quite the same as the old stuff anymore... I know several owners of camera shops and they all said the same thing, so I assume this is true :-) I like it a lot!
@Phillip Banes Yes, it's always been Kodak stock. All the Lomo color negative films are basically old Kodak Gold/Max stocks, but some of them have been altered since Kodak sold them under their own brand name.
@Phillip Banes By Kodak, of course! They changed the base and tweaked the formula on Lomo 100, I think it was in 2017 or 2018. It didn't make that much of a difference, but the sharpness and colour reproduction were supposedly improved. Which just means it's not exactly the same as the old Gold 100 anymore.
Hmmmm, interesting! I would love to be able to just ask Lomo and find out for sure. Which I don't think is happening. Regardless, whatever it is, I like it!
@@KyleMcDougall Yeah, I wish they could be a little more honest about where the film comes from. Don't really see any point in hiding it, and it's not really a secret anyway. Good film :-)
@@35mm21 That wouldn't surprise me at all. Kodak makes weird choices sometimes, that's for sure. Lomo Color film is constantly sold out where I live. They could have sold loads more if they wanted/had the capacity. You'd think they would want credit for that!
I’ve shot some Ultramax 800 and it looks just like Lomo 800. Lomo 800 is definitely not Portra cause it’s too grainy. As for 400 it might be an older Gold emulsion and not the current Ultramax. Lomo 100 looks quite similar to Pro Image too.
@@35mm21 That’s what I’ve tested. I took out a roll from a disposable and put it in my rangefinder. But the colors and grain look just like Lomo 800. I feel grain is the biggest give away. If you compare shots from different films done on the same scanner the grain looks always different.
I prefer Homography 420. It produces a dazzling rainbow of fruity colors and creamy bokeh that really gives my photos a big boost. The slow process of inserting a large roll of 120 into my camera feels just right, then I wait with anticipation for that ultimate money shot.
Not to be a bad influence but if you have the money for it or you just have been wanting one for a long while go ahead and buy it and give a try...keep in mind that it's obviously more expensive than 135 but you can always give it a try
@@a.m.m.f I just can't figure out how to justify it. If you know what I mean. I still haven't get comfortable with the whole scanning/digitization process:/
@@SteffenMiethke i mean idk how much money are we talking about. I was incredibly lucky to get my uncle's old Mamita C220 which can be found on eBay realtively cheap and been shooting with it on and off and I get pretty good results, meaning you don't need a super expensive film camera, they pretty much all do the same thing.... As for getting comfortable with the scanning process I'd say the best way is to practice and practice and read a ton about it on the internet. There's a ton of people that will have written about your struggles or questions out there and no need to worry if you do not get the result u want at the first try, you'll still have the negatives around
@@a.m.m.f were talking a Mamiya 654 E with 6 lenses and some other stuff. For close to 1000€. Its a good offer because the camera is basically new. And for the scanning: thanks for the kind words! I will try more for sure in the future.
@@35mm21 MF is definitely the film to go with (if possible)! And I actually tried out the V600 and was very unhappy with the results. But thanks so much for the input:D
Kyle, the photo at 3:43 is amazing. The shade of blue, the depth of field, and light hitting the steering wheel/flowers. So so good, dude.
Thank you, Daniel. I appreciate that. One of my favourites as well from the day.
I really enjoy the way you produce your videos Kyle. They’re always so informative and enjoyable to watch. Really inspiring stuff. Great images by the way!
Really appreciate that, Michael. Cheers!
Lomo 800 is an absolute gem, epecially on 35mm. It's my absolute go to film when I can get my hands on some, and it even pushes extremely well into 1600 to give you some really great capabilities of hand holding in interior scenes.
The grain on 800 on 120 is also pretty flattering, and not very noticeable for a high ISO film.
Just about to shoot some 800 in 120 next weekend, and I was wondering how well it would push as I'll be doing some interior stuff. Good to know.
@@KyleMcDougall I can't say I agree, lomo 800 is without a doubt the worst colour film stock I have ever used. Grainy, horrible colour and definitely not an 800 speed film.
I recently tried out some Lomo 800 but I don't think it came out all that well. I am fairly new to film photography so it is most likely user error. I'm super thankful for UA-cam and how easily accessible learning and tips are for all kinds of things. So hopefully my next roll will be much better. If you're interested you can see my results from the roll of Lomo 800 on my channel. If not, thats also cool.
I really liked the panning shot of the yellow car! Great video Kyle.
Cheers, Mike!
The way the colors render out is amazing!
I was impressed. :)
Thank you for showing us your process "under the bonnet" regarding your process for editing film. It's honest and informative. I hope you are enjoying your time here in England, even with the turbulent weather!
Cheers, Tom! The turbulent weather keeps things interesting. :)
Thanks Kyle! Super useful. And beautifully put together as always. Pretty much zero fat and yet never void of character.
Cheers, Andy!
Great review of this film. You do a very thorough job.
The Wimbledon White Mustang with the couple sitting inside was an incredibly touching photo! Nicely done.
Cheers, Greg. One of my favourites as well.
The in-depth post-process section is incredibly helpful for me. Thanks so much for that Kyle.
You're welcome. Cheers.
Very impressive colours from those shot at the car show.
Wonderful photos Kyle. I love the one with old couple sitting next to each other. Classic look!
Thank you! One of my favourites as well.
The side profile of the VW bus is wonderful!
Thanks, Alex.
I especially like the shot of the green Riviera. Nice tones and color 👍
Thank you.
Love lomo! Really love the color rendering and grain on the 100 and 800 and I'm planning on using it as the dedicated stock for a street photography project in mind
Shooting some 800 in 120 next weekend. Looking forward to seeing what it's like in the larger format.
Photos of cars are oftentimes a dime a dozen, but the way you got the shots with the people IN the cars is absolutely stellar and really elevates something of a stale subject of analog photography. Kudos for that. I'd love to see a zine just focused on this type of theme alone.
Thanks, Justin. This isn't normally the type of event or thing I'd shoot, but it was a fun day out with the camera and I'm happy with the images. Glad you enjoyed them.
I always always always keep 120 800 in the fridge. I don’t get along with 400. I’m not certain why. Just happy they are another option for us.
Shooting some 800 in 120 this weekend. Looking forward to it.
I've found that Ektar color shift issues in the shadows is almost always a scanner setting issue, or caused by inversion software. When camera scanning and inverting by hand, I don't have this issues. My older scans from my minolta scanner and flat bed scanner had this issue. Scans inverted by software had this issue... its a film that needs a special care.
Thanks! Looks indeed much better than expected.
You're welcome.
I’ll be sure to check these out if I see them in stores. Thanks, great video!
looks like a gorgeous film. Thanks
Nice!
I shot a roll of their 100 speed film and liked what I got!
Love these photos! Thank you for sharing. I’ve been looking into these stocks for a while ands definitely want to try it out now
Cheers!
Agree, lomo film has a nice look. Had problems using it for long exposures in my pinhole camera. Image of backing paper coming thru on a couple of rolls.
Interesting to hear. I've heard some other complaints about backing paper issues.
Really enjoyed this mate. I’ve always been apprehensive to buy it myself but will look forward to giving it a go now.
Cheers, Jamie!
Enjoyed your thoughts on this stock Kyle. Thanks mate
Cheers, Colin!
Well…I’m a film photographer and a complete Lotus car nut. So yes, I’m enjoying thoroughly this video!🙏🏼
Glad you enjoyed it!
This is actually good, shot it with my Hasselblad and liked the results.
another great video man! keep it up.
Glad you enjoyed, Shayd. Cheers.
Nice video Kyle and great view of Lomo 100 - love the car images!
Thank you. :)
amazing video as always Kyle thank you for your input and vast knowledge on this film stock!
🙏
Cheers for all the info Kyle, actually the next film I wanted to try on 120 so nice to know what it can do. Great stuff!
I'm sure you'll like it! Cheers.
the only problem that I have with lomo's film is they have a shorter backing paper, sometimes may jam my shutter.
thanks Kyle, such a nice review!
Glad you enjoyed, Hannah!
i was wondering if you came across my lomo 400 video. great stuff man!
I remember you posting that one!
I have found in my limited experience that different brands will use slightly different film cassets. More specifically the internal spool of a 35mm cartridge. For example, Fujifilm 200 used to have a different canister and casset. Because it is now rebranded Kodak Gold 200, the canister and casset is identical. If the canister, casset and fastening mechanism to the internal spool are similar to Kodak, it is probably Kodak.
gotta try this, looks pretty good
I'm sure you'd enjoy it!
Around the 4:15 mark you mention setting ISO to 80 "just to be safe." For a film photography novice, can you (or anyone else reading this) explain why setting your camera lower than box-speed would be a smart decision?
Always better to overexpose negative film than underexpose it (way more tolerant)
If you set it a bit lower than box-speed, the camera will overexpose the film just a little. Its just to make sure you get all the detail in the shadows. Film can handle overexposure much better than underexposure. Its easier to bring the highlights down in post compared to bring the shadows up. This is the opposite when shooting digital.
Yep, as mentioned below. I'll often do this if I'm using the internal meter in a camera, just as insurance incase it underexposes a bit in a certain situation.
@@KyleMcDougall Thank you all! And Kyle thanks for the videos. You've been an excellent resource.
Amazing video as always❤️🔥
Cheers, Kenneth.
Beginner here, just wondering how the shot at 4:43 is taken? The subject is moving but its less blurred than the rest, only thing I can guess is that it was shot with low-ish shutter speed and the subject's movement was tracked with the camera? Thanks
Yeah, the camera pan needs to match with the speed of the subject to keep it sharp while the background is blurred. Really common for car race photography, and you're right about the shutter speed needing to be low for a more dramatic blur.
@@filmjkk Thanks! Yeah I can tell it's a hard shot to nail but it looks damn good
Yep, what was mentioned above. I believe this was shot with a 1/15-second shutter speed, and then panning to match the speed of the car. It can be hit or miss.
thanks for sharing!
Keep plugging way with Ektar man, the rewards are so worth it
I know! I've seen a lot of beautiful work shot with it. Just always struggle with it myself.
Image quality of the Lomo CN stocks is quite good, and I much like the look. But I have problems with it in 120 format in old (folding) cameras, as it does not wind up properly (the roll gets much too thick). I guess this has to do with the coating of the backing paper.
I've heard complaints about the backing paper before. I did have issues with light leaks on a roll of 400. But other than that, has been good so far.
@@KyleMcDougall The coating on the backing paper seems to be too "smooth" or slippery, so that the (very primitive means) of keeping tension on the film don't work properly with old folding cameras. Should be no problem with later, more professional MF cameras. I didn't have light leaks so far.
@@KyleMcDougall I also have this Problem in my Fuji GA645, Bronica SQA and Pentax 67. In the last year I shot around 15 rolls of Lomo 400 and in 5 - 6 rolls have this problem. It's really disappointing because I like Lomo. I contacted Lomography about this, but they said that they had never heard of this problem before. But I read a lot about this. I cannot believe they never heard about this. So it seems like they don't care about this problem. I think it's quite a big problem and I cant use Lomo in my Cameras properly anymore.
When I remember Fuji Superia 100, I'm overwhelmed in the same way as when I remember someone dear to me, who died...
Beautiful video and photos as always, Kyle. Great car show, too!
One small *criticism* -
Critique: a detailed analysis and assessment of something, especially a literary, philosophical, or political theory
Criticism: the expression of disapproval of someone or something on the basis of perceived faults or mistakes
Cheers, Steven. Bound to mess some things up from time to time. Thanks for watching.
@@KyleMcDougall How dare you! I want my money back! 😂
I always feel that 120 film never have as heavy a look as their 35mm counterparts.
Never got that magenta look on any of my roll. Might just be how they’re scanned.
I'm currently shooting a roll of lomo800 on a rollei 35. any tip on shooting it. thank you in advance
I've only shot one roll, and I rated it at 400, as it was in an auto exposure camera.
lomos underrated!! colors are so nice
Agreed. :)
Is that you can get Kodak Gold in 120, I find no use for Lomo 100 anymore to be honest. Gold is also cheaper, gives you an extra stop and less grainy In my own experience.
How come you use Negative lab pro instead of Lightroom to do those same edits? Also, can you put the negatives into Lightroom and then make them positive by taking the top right end of the tone curve all the way down and the lower left end all the way up?
I enjoy using the panel in NLP, and have found that I end up making as many adjustments as possible with it. And you can always go back and tweak if necessary. As for manual conversion in LR, yes, you can do that as well. It's been a while since I've done it, and I believe you need a specific technique to compensate for the orange mask.
Do u shoot all Manuel mode?
Manual on the P67, as that's the only option. Usually aperture priority on the P645.
I think Lomo 100 started out as the old medium format Kodak Gold 100. But I have it on good authority that they changed the base and altered the formula slightly a few years ago, so it's not quite the same as the old stuff anymore... I know several owners of camera shops and they all said the same thing, so I assume this is true :-) I like it a lot!
@Phillip Banes Yes, it's always been Kodak stock. All the Lomo color negative films are basically old Kodak Gold/Max stocks, but some of them have been altered since Kodak sold them under their own brand name.
@Phillip Banes By Kodak, of course! They changed the base and tweaked the formula on Lomo 100, I think it was in 2017 or 2018. It didn't make that much of a difference, but the sharpness and colour reproduction were supposedly improved. Which just means it's not exactly the same as the old Gold 100 anymore.
Hmmmm, interesting! I would love to be able to just ask Lomo and find out for sure. Which I don't think is happening. Regardless, whatever it is, I like it!
@@KyleMcDougall Yeah, I wish they could be a little more honest about where the film comes from. Don't really see any point in hiding it, and it's not really a secret anyway. Good film :-)
@@35mm21 That wouldn't surprise me at all. Kodak makes weird choices sometimes, that's for sure. Lomo Color film is constantly sold out where I live. They could have sold loads more if they wanted/had the capacity. You'd think they would want credit for that!
I've literally never seen this film in stock anywhere.
Can find lots of it over here in England. I get the feeling it fluctuates though.
I’ve shot some Ultramax 800 and it looks just like Lomo 800. Lomo 800 is definitely not Portra cause it’s too grainy. As for 400 it might be an older Gold emulsion and not the current Ultramax. Lomo 100 looks quite similar to Pro Image too.
@@35mm21 That’s what I’ve tested. I took out a roll from a disposable and put it in my rangefinder. But the colors and grain look just like Lomo 800. I feel grain is the biggest give away. If you compare shots from different films done on the same scanner the grain looks always different.
Lomo 800 is portra 800, 100% sure
I wish!
parem de subir o preço dos unicos films que ainda se consegue comprar
Everything is expensive in England now.
lovely phoos
Thank you.
I prefer Homography 420.
It produces a dazzling rainbow of fruity colors and creamy bokeh that really gives my photos a big boost.
The slow process of inserting a large roll of 120 into my camera feels just right, then I wait with anticipation for that ultimate money shot.
the intro of your videos always remind me of some satire south park video 😆
I have no idea if that's a compliment or not, but thanks, I think... 😅
I'm always trying to keep myself from buying a medium format off my grandmas friend... then you post a video and I am back at 0🤣🥲
Not to be a bad influence but if you have the money for it or you just have been wanting one for a long while go ahead and buy it and give a try...keep in mind that it's obviously more expensive than 135 but you can always give it a try
@@a.m.m.f I just can't figure out how to justify it. If you know what I mean. I still haven't get comfortable with the whole scanning/digitization process:/
@@SteffenMiethke i mean idk how much money are we talking about. I was incredibly lucky to get my uncle's old Mamita C220 which can be found on eBay realtively cheap and been shooting with it on and off and I get pretty good results, meaning you don't need a super expensive film camera, they pretty much all do the same thing....
As for getting comfortable with the scanning process I'd say the best way is to practice and practice and read a ton about it on the internet. There's a ton of people that will have written about your struggles or questions out there and no need to worry if you do not get the result u want at the first try, you'll still have the negatives around
@@a.m.m.f were talking a Mamiya 654 E with 6 lenses and some other stuff. For close to 1000€. Its a good offer because the camera is basically new.
And for the scanning: thanks for the kind words! I will try more for sure in the future.
@@35mm21 MF is definitely the film to go with (if possible)!
And I actually tried out the V600 and was very unhappy with the results.
But thanks so much for the input:D